Thanks to a couple of surveys, its being put about in certain circles that atheists have higher IQs than believers. That may or may not be the case, but one problem with this argument is that, if you accept "average group differences in IQ, you get into all sorts of sinister debates which bien pensant atheist Lefties might find less to their liking.

There have been several studies of late that purportedly show that atheists have a higher average IQ, and that increased IQ is correlated to lowered or no religious belief. The correlation is that believers are more stupid.
This article counters that in several ways. Higher IQ doesn’t mean a better life. The article points out:
* Believers recover faster from injuries.
* Atheists have fewer kids. They are less likely to marry and more likely to divorce. Therefore, atheists act in ways contrary to social stability.
* Religious people are less likely to be depressed or commit suicide and have more friends - AKA, emotionally healthier.
* Seriously religious people (attending 2 or more services a month) are less likely to abuse drugs, alcohol and partners. Atheists are more likely to be addicted to alcohol, drugs and other substances.
* While atheism is correlated with advanced education like a master’s degree or doctoral degree, average kids who attend religious schools are more likely to graduate and to get an associate’s or bachelor’s degree than others - especially in the inner city.

So while atheists are theoretically the most educated and have the highest IQ, they are the least likely to have happy families, children, strong social relationships, be addiction free or happy in their relationships. Atheists are most likely to not donate money, be mean, die of an overdose, have no strong familial relationships, high blood pressure, poor health and kill themselves. While theoretically “smarter” and “better educated”, they are socially, physically and - in Darwinian terms - ill suited for life.

I think that’s a little harsh, but I do believe it is humanity’s natural state to believe in a Creator or a Designer. A recent study on infants found it to be the case. They see design in the world around them without somebody telling them its there.

For this reason, I do consider atheists somewhat distant from our natural state.

If you had a new tribe stranded on an island who knew nothing of the world, no internet, no books, no speeches from anyone, over time what would they come to believe? History has very few examples of cases in which societies developed to be irreligious. People sought out causes and reason beyond the natural world, because the natural world cannot answer the most important questions of life. It is that search for truth that crafts ‘religion’.

To dissuade people from asking such questions and seeking out answers requires incredible opposite forces.
In the case of North Korea, the threat of death.
In the case of the UK, a slow, zombifying diet of reality T.V. and gossip magazines.

The author is not speaking of the fine points of creed. Babies can't do math, either; but they are hardwired to do some eventually, and some scholars believe humans are hardwired for faith, as well. That may explain why atheists are so defensive about their belief system, even though it is based in denial.

Fascinating you post this. Just last week, I was listening to a daily radio installment of the late, great J. Vernon McGee’s “Through the Bible” broadcast.

On this station, he is currently going through the Book of Psalms. On this day, he was discussing Psalm 14. In the first verse of this Psalm, we read, “The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.”

First, we should keep in mind that, back in McGee’s day (he passed away in 1988), atheists were a much more exotic species than they are today. Nonetheless, they did exist, and McGee was unapologetic in his discussion of them. He says that Psalm 14:1 can be safely interpreted to say “the insane says in his heart there is no god.” I even found an online article by McGee saying the same thing: http://articles.ochristian.com/article15639.shtml

Additionally, John Calvin says in his commentary on this verse: “ . . . yet I am content to follow the more generally received interpretation, which is, that all profane persons, who have cast off all fear of God and abandoned themselves to iniquity, are convicted of *madness*. David does not bring against his enemies the charge of common foolishness, but rather inveighs against the folly and *insane* hardihood of those whom the world accounts eminent for their wisdom....” [Asterisks mine.]http://www.studylight.org/com/cal/view.cgi?bk=18&ch=14

So, there is biblical support for the view that atheists are not mentally whole or stable or sane, though, of course, we live in an age which regards the atheist with more respect than the devout Christian believer.

Christianity believes that because man is a fallen creature, and is in bondage to sin, and has a sinful nature, he is not able, on his own volition, to create a perfect society on earth. The only way he can be made perfect is by the grace of God. So, socialists need atheism in order to believe that man is capable of establishing a perfect socialist utopian heaven on earth without God’s help.

At my father’s funeral, the priest pointed out that as children our parents are our first God. They know it all, take care of us, hold us, teach us. As we get older, we come to the place where we realize that our parents are mortals like us, and are fellow pilgrims on the road to God.

A baby is naturally self-centered, but he isn’t in awe of himself and doesn’t cry out to himself for aid.

I think its more accurage to say the average American is ignorant rather than stupid, which is both better and worse. Better in the sense that you can do something about ignorance. Worse in the sense that so few people bother to.

Theres a “lack of evidence” for all manner of things, but people (icluding atheists) still believe in them. There are people who don’t think there’s enough evidence that a man walked on the moon. There are people who genuinely think there isn’t enough evidence that Al Quaeda carried out the 9/11 attacks. Now you think there’s a lack of evidence for the existence of the divine. Fine - but you have to concede there are plenty of people (far more in fact) who think there IS enough evidence. It follows that the quality of evidence must be a function of a belief system. After all, the available evidence is the same for everyone. Therefore you either believe or dont believe that it is sufficient. This is what MaxAmerica is trying to get over.

Here is a tricky question.Would anyone believe in God if going to heaven was not in the equasion? If there is no heaven or hell, what would it matter? When some one can actually tell me where either one of these places exist I might change my mind.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.